(Scotland) The power to detain a person suffering from a mental illness, in order to ensure the safety of the public, and even though there was no real possibility of treatment of the mental condition in hospital, was not a disproportionate contravention of that person’s human rights. Article 5(1) made no reference either to the purpose of detention, or any requirement that the condition should be susceptible to treatment, even though it made explicit exceptions. There was nothing in the Convention which gave the rights of the detainee who was a danger to society a priority over the rights of other citizens to live in peace and security. The Convention exists to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of each and every individual.
Orse: Anderson and Others v Scottish Ministers and Another
Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Clyde, Lord Hutton and Lord Scott of Foscote
Times 29-Oct-2001, [2002] 1 WLR 1460, [2001] UKPC D5, [2003] 2 AC 602, [2002] UKHRR 1, [2002] HRLR 6, 2001 SLT 1331, 2002 SC (PC) 63, 2001 GWD 33-1312
PC, Bailii
Mental Health (Public Safety and Appeals) (Scotland) Act 1999 1, European Convention on Human Rights Art 5(1)
Scotland
Citing:
Cited – Winterwerp v The Netherlands ECHR 24-Oct-1979
A Dutch national detained in hospital complained that his detention had divested him of his capacity to administer his property, and thus there had been determination of his civil rights and obligations without the guarantee of a judicial procedure. . .
Appeal from – Karl Anderson, Brian Doherty, and Alexander Reid v The Scottish Ministers and the Advocate General for Scotland IHCS 16-Jun-2000
Where a person had been detained under mental health legislation on one ground, but then came to be seen to be somebody from whom protection was needed by the population on another ground, it was not a breach of his human rights to detain him on the . .
Cited by:
Cited – Regina (on the Application of Cawser) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 5-Nov-2003
The claimant was serving a prison sentence for serious sexual offences. He would not be released until he had completed a sex offenders programme, but one was not made available, delaying his release.
Held: ‘The Secretary of State is not under . .
Appealed to – Karl Anderson, Brian Doherty, and Alexander Reid v The Scottish Ministers and the Advocate General for Scotland IHCS 16-Jun-2000
Where a person had been detained under mental health legislation on one ground, but then came to be seen to be somebody from whom protection was needed by the population on another ground, it was not a breach of his human rights to detain him on the . .
Cited – Whaley and Another v Lord Advocate HL 28-Nov-2007
The House considered claims that the 2002 Act, which set out to make unawful the hunting of wild mammals with dogs unlawful, infringed the claimants’ human rights, in that it contravened international treaties requiring the support for traditional . .
Cited – Countryside Alliance and others, Regina (on the Application of) v Attorney General and Another HL 28-Nov-2007
The appellants said that the 2004 Act infringed their rights under articles 8 11 and 14 and Art 1 of protocol 1.
Held: Article 8 protected the right to private and family life. Its purpose was to protect individuals from unjustified intrusion . .
Cited – Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate SC 12-Dec-2012
The claimant company said that the 2010 Act was outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament insofar as it severely restricted the capacity of those selling cigarettes to display them for sale. They suggested two faults. First, that the subject . .
Cited – Local Government Byelaws (Wales) Bill 2012 – Reference By The Attorney General for England and Wales SC 21-Nov-2012
Under the 1998 and 2006 Acts, the Welsh Assembly was empowered to pass legislation subject to confirmation by the English Parliament Secretary of State. The Local Government Byelaws (Wales) Bill 2012 was passed by the Assembly and purported to . .
Cited – References (Bills) By The Attorney General and The Advocate General for Scotland – United Nations Convention On The Rights of The Child and European Charter of Local Self-Government SC 6-Oct-2021
Scots Bills Outwith their Competence
The AG questioned the constitutionaliity of Bills designed to give effect to two treaties to which the UK is a signatory, and passed by the Scottish Parliament as to the care of children.
Held: The laws had effect also outside Scotland . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 October 2021; Ref: scu.174562
